F&Y2 Wave 5-6 NI: Chapter 4: Eating out and takeaways

Introduction

The Food Hygiene Rating Scheme (FHRS) helps people make informed choices about where to eat out or shop for food by giving clear information about the businesses’ hygiene standards. Ratings are typically given to places where food is supplied, sold or consumed, including restaurants, pubs, cafés, takeaways, food vans and stalls.

The FSA runs the scheme in partnership with district councils in Northern Ireland, and with local authorities in England and Wales. In Northern Ireland, district council food safety officers are responsible for checking food hygiene standards at food premises to assess compliance with legal requirements through unannounced hygiene inspections. Businesses are given a rating from 0 to 5. A rating of 5 indicates that hygiene standards are very good and a rating of 0 indicates that urgent improvement is required.

Food businesses are provided with a sticker which shows their FHRS rating. In Northern Ireland and Wales food businesses are legally required to display their FHRS rating ^{(footnote 1)}, however in England businesses are encouraged to display their FHRS rating . FHRS ratings are also available on the FSA website.

This chapter provides an overview of respondents’ eating out and takeaway ordering habits, the factors that are considered when deciding where to order a takeaway from, and recognition and use of the FHRS.

Prevalence of eating out and ordering takeaways

Source: Food & You 2: Wave 6

Respondents were asked where they had eaten out or ordered food from in the previous 4 weeks. The most common places respondents reported eating food was from a café, coffee shop or sandwich shop (either to eat in or take out) (66%), ordered a takeaway directly from a takeaway shop or restaurant (66%) or eaten out in a restaurant (64%). Around 1 in 10 (9%) respondents had not eaten food from any of the listed food businesses in the previous 4 weeks (Figure 9) ^{(footnote 2)}.

Source: Food and You 2: Wave 6

Younger respondents were more likely to have eaten out from a takeaway (ordered directly or online) in the previous 4 weeks compared to older respondents. For example, 89% of respondents aged 25 to 34 years had eaten food from a takeaway (ordered directly or online) compared to 55% of those aged 65 to 79 years (Figure 10).

The prevalence of eating out in a restaurant, pub or bar or eating food from a takeaway (ordered directly or online) in the previous 4 weeks also varied between different types of people in the following ways:

• household size: respondents who lived in larger households were more likely to have eaten food from a takeaway than those who lived in smaller households. For example, 83% of respondents living in a household with 5 or more people had eaten food from a takeaway compared to 50% of respondents living alone. 
• annual household income: respondents with a higher household income between £19,000 and £95,999 (for example 77% of respondents with an income of £32,000-£64,999) were more likely to have eaten out in a restaurant, pub or bar, in the previous 4 weeks compared to respondents with an income below £19,000 (54%) ^{(footnote 3)}. Similarly, those with an annual household income of more than £19,000 (for example, 78% of respondents with an income of £32,000- £63,999) were more likely to have eaten food from a takeaway than those with an income of less than £19,000 (66%).
• children under 16 years in household: respondents who had children in the household (81%) were more likely to have eaten food from a takeaway than those who did not have children aged 16 years or under in the household (70%). However, the prevalence of eating out in a restaurant, pub or bar did not differ between those with (68%) or without (70%) children aged 16 years or under in the household**.
• NS-SEC: respondents in managerial, administrative and professional occupations (73%) were more likely to have eaten out in a restaurant, pub or bar compared to those in semi-routine and routine occupations (63%).
• food security: respondents with high food security (74%) were more likely to have eaten out in a restaurant, pub or bar than those with low (60%) or very low food security (51%). However, those with very low food security (82%) were more likely to have eaten food from a takeaway than those with marginal food security (70%).
• long term health condition: respondents without a long-term health condition (73%) were more likely to have eaten out in a restaurant, pub or bar compared to respondents who had a long-term health condition (59%). However the prevalence of eating food from a takeaway did not differ between those with (74%) or without (74%) a long-term health condition**. 
• NIMDM: respondents who lived in the least deprived areas (NIMDM 5) (78%) were more likely to have eaten out in a restaurant, pub or bar compared to respondents who lived in the most deprived areas (NIMDM 1) (62%). However, the proportion of respondents who had eaten food from a takeaway did not vary between areas of deprivation (for example NIMDM 1, 74% compared to NIMDM 5, 73%)**. 
• responsibility for cooking: Respondents who reported having responsibility for cooking (71%) were more likely to have eaten out in a restaurant, pub or bar compared to those who do not cook (55%).

Eating out and takeaways by mealtime

Source: Food & You 2: Wave 6

Respondents were asked how often they ate out or bought food to take out for breakfast, lunch, and dinner. Respondents were least likely to eat out or buy food to take out for breakfast, with 48% of respondents never doing this. Around half of respondents (52%) reported that they ate out or bought take out food for lunch 2-3 times a month or less often (Figure 11) ^{(footnote 4)}.

Factors considered when ordering a takeaway 

Respondents were asked which factors, from a given list, they generally considered when deciding where to order a takeaway from ^{(footnote 5)}.

Source: Food & You 2: Wave 6

Of those who had ordered food from a takeaway, the factors most commonly considered when deciding where to place an order were the respondents’ previous experience of the takeaway (81%) and the quality of food (73%). In addition, 4 in 10 (40%) respondents considered the food hygiene rating when deciding where to order a takeaway from (Figure 12) ^{(footnote 6)}.

Awareness and recognition of the FHRS

Source: Food and You 2: Wave 6

Most respondents (91%) reported that they had heard of the FHRS. 65% of respondents reported that they had heard of the FHRS and had at least a bit of knowledge about it ^{(footnote 7)}, ^{(footnote 8)}.

Most respondents living in Northern Ireland (91%), England (86%), and Wales (92%), had heard of the FHRS (Figure 13)**. Respondents in Wales (69%) and Northern Ireland (65%) were more likely to report that they had heard of the FHRS and had at least some knowledge of the FHRS compared to those in England (54%).

When shown an image of the FHRS sticker, recognition of the FHRS sticker was comparable across Northern Ireland (93%), Wales (91%) and England (87%)** ^{(footnote 9)}.

FHRS usage

Respondents living in Wales (59%) were more likely to have checked the hygiene rating of a food business in the last 12 months compared to respondents in Northern Ireland (48%) and England (42%) ^{(footnote 10)}.

Source: Food & You 2: Wave 6

Respondents who said they had checked the hygiene rating of a food business in the last 12 months were asked what types of food businesses they had checked. The most common types of food business which respondents had checked the food rating of were restaurants (76%) and takeaways (74%) (Figure 14) ^{(footnote 11)}.